The whole point he was making was "wow, they sure spent a lot of time making this game pretty, too bad the play stinks." That is a rather common problem in the game industry.
The only way this could be considered marketing vs. an honest review is if you think graphics are far more important than game play. In that case, it sounds, from what this guy said, that this game'd be for you.
I don't think there is much that we, the little people, can do to stop new legislation. Those bastards think that to stop what is percieved as piracy is to physically prevent us from doing it. Screw our rights. They're pre-punishing us by trying to take our rights away.
That's what the DMCA and the SSSCA is about. Total control. Unfortunately, the people backing this up have enough money to leverage their way, but we the consumers don't have a focused way of using our money back at them. All we can do is not buy their products down the road. By then, the damage is done.
So what can we do? Well, I had an idea about that. Imagine if independent people started making movies and putting them on the net. Imagine if they didn't encrypt the movies so that people could re-edit them. Imagine if they gave us allllll the fair use rights we used to have, yet they charged a price lower than that of what the MPAA provides to us with DVD's.
Think about the ramifications of this for a sec. If people start buying content form the indie guys and they can do more with it for cheaper than with the big meanie corporate guys, then the laws the MPAA would try to pass would be void. Imagine somebody taking a DVD back to a store: "I don't get this, I bought this one movie and I can take screengrabs of it, but I bought this DVD for more and I can't do that!".
I say we get the people of slashdot to scour the web for independent content and let the authors of that content know how we feel. IF we can get them to cooperate, then the next generation of movie makers may very well realize that movies are about fun, not about screwing customers out of every last penny.
If the SSSCA is eventually passed in some form, only the content that is specifically watermarked should be affected. If the new up and coming moviemakers decide not to encode it that way, then we, the consumers, are safe. Our fair use comes back to us, and we don't have to buy our own legal peeps to do it.
You dont HAVE to have a girl there to have sexual performance. Some buys prefer Visual Basic because a good deal of it is mouse driven. That means they have a hand free. I bet those guys have improved sexual performance then!
Just curious. I'm still fuzzy on why anybody's worried about information being collected. So far, the only problem I've had with it is now my email address is recieving 'special offers!' a couple of times a day.
I'm not trying to tell anybody their concerns are unjustified, I'm seriously curious as to what I should be concerned about. In other words, if I take a stand against Double Click, I'd like to be educated as to why. That's all.
Sounds like you have a shitty computer. You really shouldn't buy a Compaq and then blame Windows for it being unstable.;)
Meanwhile... my computer, which has been up for well over a week, is running Lightwave (Both LW Apps: Layout and MOdeler), Photoshop with an image I haven't saved yet, Opera which is not really all that stable (still tolerable, though...) Winamp, Kazaa, Outlook, and all on a Dual Monitor setup.
Sounds to me that Windows 2000 is doing pretty damn good. Could Linux do better? Perhaps. That's not the focus of this debate. The debate was that MS said that Win2k provided greater stability. It did. Case closed. You cannot argue that it didn't. It's over. I win.
This question isn't being posed to internet seasoned people. It's ludicrous to think that they were asking what to send to a group of people who work on the net for a living. What they were really asking was 'what can we do to help get non-initiated ppl to the net?'
I end up playing technical support for my family. I don't like it. I don't like explaining what TCP/IP is. I don't like having to set up Internet Explorer to look on the LAN for the net connection instead of trying to dial up. And I really don't like the terminology that Windows uses to get you running. It's silly really.
You know what the ISP should provide? It should provide the information to the computer on how it should be set up. If the CD basically told the computer 'Go to DHCP, set your programs to look on the lan for the internet connection, and then go!' that'd be all most people really cared about.
When @Home went down, AT&T BI set up their DNS so that no matter what address you went to, you ended up at a web page that says "Download and run this file." When you did that, it set up my computer for what the new network was. That was so cool. I didn't have to plug any new data in. That's what the CD should do.
I don't agree with you. First off, what is there to replace Windows on all the millions of machines out there? Certainly not Linux. It will be at least a year or two before Linux can do, for the un-initiated new user, what Windows does for you.
I agree that MS will likely get bumped out of the Server Market. The reason for that is a server doesn't need programs like.... Outlook Express? Or 'Virus Propogater' as we call it around here.
In any case, Windows is far from dead. If somebody can take Linux and give it most of the good points that Windows has (ease of installation, better compatibility, GUI amdinistration instead of relying solely on command line...), then MS should feel quite threatened.
Only a designer working on a movie like Mr. Bean or Stuart Little would use such a distasteful color scheme. If you want to know what I mean, have a gander at the houses featured in either of those movies. For some reason, the set designers thought that blood red, primary yellow, and nauseating cyan would make wonderful colors to paint rooms.
I think it's more likely that God outsourced the universe's design to one of these decorators and overpaid a bit.
Why? What's the big deal? I can understand if somebody talks too loud, but that's true of anybody, not just a phone user. I was at a McDonald's once grabbing a bite, and I called my dad and talked to him for a bit. The woman in front of me got irritated and muttered that I should get off the phone.
I never did find out what sparked that. If I was talking too loud, for example, she could have just touched her mouth in the 'sssh' sybol and been polite about it. I don't think I was talking that loud. Nobody else even looked up at me. I think she just had a conception that people with cell phones are rude. Well my response to that is 'ITS NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS.'
There's 0 difference between me talking on the phone or me talking to somebody in person. If it's okay for me to talk with somebody in person, but not on a phone, then there are some serious social issues that will arise down the road. I bet she'd be tickled to death if any of her kids called her out of the blue just to say hi, but I call my dad (who lives 2000 miles away) and I'm a rude jerk. If it's distracting to her to watch a guy talk to somebody that isn't there, then she can watch Quantum Leap until she gets used to it. I certainly am not turning off my phone for the simple reason that it displeases her.
If anybody is going to discrminate against people with cell phones, make damn sure the reason is unique to the cellphone itself. No phone ringing in a theater: Acceptable. No Cell phones in a Hospital because they interfere with equipment: Acceptable. No talking on a cell phone in a restaraunt: Unaccetpable.
Anybody ever pay attention to the sounds that the handlink makes on Quantum Leap? For example, it kind of goes 'waaaaahhhh' when he smacks it. That's the most obvious one, but if you listen a little more carefully, the sounds that little device makes start to emote. You can get an idea what he's reading on the screen before he actually states it.
Tom and Jerry is similar, to a degree. I ran across a cartoon of Tom and Jerry on the web a few days ago and watched it. I noticed something very interesting. The music in the cartoon responded to every little movement that the characters made. You listen to the music, for example, and tell if Jerry was tiptoe'ing or running. That was a very interesting dimension to Tom and Jerry. That is the type of element that would allow you to watch a slideshow of the show with the sound track and still keep track of what's going on.
This article was very interesting because I think it may be the start of making computer interfaces take advantage of audio responses that don't even require words. I've spent a great deal of time assigning different sounds in Windows to different events. For example, I have a very distinctive sound that ICQ makes when I recieve a message. I even went as far as to provide different people with different sounds. I noticed something very interesting, when I went to use ICQ on another machine, I ached to hear the sounds again. It was so strange not hearing them!
I hope one day Windows (or whatever OS I use in the future...) spends more effort into providing a sound-enhanced interface. That would truely provide better a better multi-tasking experience. It'd be cool if, for example, the window on the screen causing the sound was played through the right or left speaker based on where the window is on the screen. Maybe muffle it if a window is under it.
Anybody know of any products for Windows that do this today?
"Today, Mr. Davis has not only kicked his Web habit but also almost completely given up the medium."
*Sigh* I remember some news articles suggesting that people were spending too much time on the web. They made it out like the web was addictive and that kids would trade social lives for it. I hated this assumption. I knew people that spent lots of time on IRC, heck I was one of them. It wasnt an addiction so much as just hanging out. Most of the time I was on IRC I was also reading about stuff on the net, trying out new apps, etc.
Nowadays, I've achieved some skills that I'm really interested in sharpening. So now a lot of my 'net time' is being spent developing new artwork. I found a place to show off my art, get some critique, and measure myself against the other people out there.
I've really integrated the net into my life. I know use both email and instant messaging to keep tabs on my friends, I use tools like Mapquest to get directions to where I'm going, I even get movie reviews and showtimes!
I'm not just hunting around the web anymore, I've figured out where I need to go. It's still a very important part of my life. Am I spending less time on it? Yes, I think so. That time's being spent to contribute to the net, though. For example, I post here waaaay too much. Heh.
I'm sick of surfing the web being called 'an addiction' like it needs to be treated. That'd be like saying Nasa scientists are addicted to surfing the universe for interesting things.
Slashdot Mirror
The whole point he was making was "wow, they sure spent a lot of time making this game pretty, too bad the play stinks." That is a rather common problem in the game industry.
The only way this could be considered marketing vs. an honest review is if you think graphics are far more important than game play. In that case, it sounds, from what this guy said, that this game'd be for you.
I don't think there is much that we, the little people, can do to stop new legislation. Those bastards think that to stop what is percieved as piracy is to physically prevent us from doing it. Screw our rights. They're pre-punishing us by trying to take our rights away.
That's what the DMCA and the SSSCA is about. Total control. Unfortunately, the people backing this up have enough money to leverage their way, but we the consumers don't have a focused way of using our money back at them. All we can do is not buy their products down the road. By then, the damage is done.
So what can we do? Well, I had an idea about that. Imagine if independent people started making movies and putting them on the net. Imagine if they didn't encrypt the movies so that people could re-edit them. Imagine if they gave us allllll the fair use rights we used to have, yet they charged a price lower than that of what the MPAA provides to us with DVD's.
Think about the ramifications of this for a sec. If people start buying content form the indie guys and they can do more with it for cheaper than with the big meanie corporate guys, then the laws the MPAA would try to pass would be void. Imagine somebody taking a DVD back to a store: "I don't get this, I bought this one movie and I can take screengrabs of it, but I bought this DVD for more and I can't do that!".
I say we get the people of slashdot to scour the web for independent content and let the authors of that content know how we feel. IF we can get them to cooperate, then the next generation of movie makers may very well realize that movies are about fun, not about screwing customers out of every last penny.
If the SSSCA is eventually passed in some form, only the content that is specifically watermarked should be affected. If the new up and coming moviemakers decide not to encode it that way, then we, the consumers, are safe. Our fair use comes back to us, and we don't have to buy our own legal peeps to do it.
Whatcha say?
You dont HAVE to have a girl there to have sexual performance. Some buys prefer Visual Basic because a good deal of it is mouse driven. That means they have a hand free. I bet those guys have improved sexual performance then!
That's better than the cum-pile joke I was about to make...
"Not all of us are on the east coast.. d'oh! :)"
You're trying REAL hard to get karma points arentcha. Anybody wanna mod this guy down as 'Obvious' or even better 'duh!'?
.. now we're going to hear a bunch of people claiming to have sex on a regular basis.
Listen: No matter how many times you've done it, you have to have had a PARTNER to claim you're an expert on it, k?
I've used the device, the keyboard's not bad at all! Here's a tip though: Drag your Super Nintendo out and get your thumbs warmed up.
I want one. Compared to a Pocket PC, it doesn't feel like a Fisher Price 'My First PDA.'
But besides collecting data, what could they do with it? Why should I be worried about any company knowing personal stuff about me?
I'm talking about privacy in general, not just Doubleclick.
Just curious. I'm still fuzzy on why anybody's worried about information being collected. So far, the only problem I've had with it is now my email address is recieving 'special offers!' a couple of times a day.
I'm not trying to tell anybody their concerns are unjustified, I'm seriously curious as to what I should be concerned about. In other words, if I take a stand against Double Click, I'd like to be educated as to why. That's all.
"I can crash win2k with edit."
;)
Sounds like you have a shitty computer. You really shouldn't buy a Compaq and then blame Windows for it being unstable.
Meanwhile... my computer, which has been up for well over a week, is running Lightwave (Both LW Apps: Layout and MOdeler), Photoshop with an image I haven't saved yet, Opera which is not really all that stable (still tolerable, though...) Winamp, Kazaa, Outlook, and all on a Dual Monitor setup.
Sounds to me that Windows 2000 is doing pretty damn good. Could Linux do better? Perhaps. That's not the focus of this debate. The debate was that MS said that Win2k provided greater stability. It did. Case closed. You cannot argue that it didn't. It's over. I win.
This question isn't being posed to internet seasoned people. It's ludicrous to think that they were asking what to send to a group of people who work on the net for a living. What they were really asking was 'what can we do to help get non-initiated ppl to the net?'
I end up playing technical support for my family. I don't like it. I don't like explaining what TCP/IP is. I don't like having to set up Internet Explorer to look on the LAN for the net connection instead of trying to dial up. And I really don't like the terminology that Windows uses to get you running. It's silly really.
You know what the ISP should provide? It should provide the information to the computer on how it should be set up. If the CD basically told the computer 'Go to DHCP, set your programs to look on the lan for the internet connection, and then go!' that'd be all most people really cared about.
When @Home went down, AT&T BI set up their DNS so that no matter what address you went to, you ended up at a web page that says "Download and run this file." When you did that, it set up my computer for what the new network was. That was so cool. I didn't have to plug any new data in. That's what the CD should do.
Do you have any idea how many atoms you can fit in something the size of a CD? That's a lot of data to store MP3's on!
"For all practical purposes, Windows is dead.
Fact: Windows is dead"
I don't agree with you. First off, what is there to replace Windows on all the millions of machines out there? Certainly not Linux. It will be at least a year or two before Linux can do, for the un-initiated new user, what Windows does for you.
I agree that MS will likely get bumped out of the Server Market. The reason for that is a server doesn't need programs like.... Outlook Express? Or 'Virus Propogater' as we call it around here.
In any case, Windows is far from dead. If somebody can take Linux and give it most of the good points that Windows has (ease of installation, better compatibility, GUI amdinistration instead of relying solely on command line...), then MS should feel quite threatened.
Only a designer working on a movie like Mr. Bean or Stuart Little would use such a distasteful color scheme. If you want to know what I mean, have a gander at the houses featured in either of those movies. For some reason, the set designers thought that blood red, primary yellow, and nauseating cyan would make wonderful colors to paint rooms.
I think it's more likely that God outsourced the universe's design to one of these decorators and overpaid a bit.
"I knew it all along; God is a She!"
Only a woman would color the universe pink and call it salmon.
I definitely agree it's easier on the eyes, but i read stuff alll day on my laptop. No biggie really. I just wish I had it in the tablet form factor.
:)
In any case, my argument wasn't that its not important at all, it's jus not as important for that particular discussion.
"Hmm, I'm being entertained by this divx'ed Matrix movie I just downloaded"
Yeah, imagine if you had a way to pay them for it too. Too bad the MPAA doesn't provide the format we want to watch it in.
It makes you wonder how they can claim to have lost billions of dollars in a market they haven't entered.
An out of context conversation might sonud funny...
"Your suggestion to eat hot-dogs tonight sounds rather cheeky."
Why? What's the big deal? I can understand if somebody talks too loud, but that's true of anybody, not just a phone user. I was at a McDonald's once grabbing a bite, and I called my dad and talked to him for a bit. The woman in front of me got irritated and muttered that I should get off the phone.
I never did find out what sparked that. If I was talking too loud, for example, she could have just touched her mouth in the 'sssh' sybol and been polite about it. I don't think I was talking that loud. Nobody else even looked up at me. I think she just had a conception that people with cell phones are rude. Well my response to that is 'ITS NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS.'
There's 0 difference between me talking on the phone or me talking to somebody in person. If it's okay for me to talk with somebody in person, but not on a phone, then there are some serious social issues that will arise down the road. I bet she'd be tickled to death if any of her kids called her out of the blue just to say hi, but I call my dad (who lives 2000 miles away) and I'm a rude jerk. If it's distracting to her to watch a guy talk to somebody that isn't there, then she can watch Quantum Leap until she gets used to it. I certainly am not turning off my phone for the simple reason that it displeases her.
If anybody is going to discrminate against people with cell phones, make damn sure the reason is unique to the cellphone itself. No phone ringing in a theater: Acceptable. No Cell phones in a Hospital because they interfere with equipment: Acceptable. No talking on a cell phone in a restaraunt: Unaccetpable.
Anybody ever pay attention to the sounds that the handlink makes on Quantum Leap? For example, it kind of goes 'waaaaahhhh' when he smacks it. That's the most obvious one, but if you listen a little more carefully, the sounds that little device makes start to emote. You can get an idea what he's reading on the screen before he actually states it.
Tom and Jerry is similar, to a degree. I ran across a cartoon of Tom and Jerry on the web a few days ago and watched it. I noticed something very interesting. The music in the cartoon responded to every little movement that the characters made. You listen to the music, for example, and tell if Jerry was tiptoe'ing or running. That was a very interesting dimension to Tom and Jerry. That is the type of element that would allow you to watch a slideshow of the show with the sound track and still keep track of what's going on.
This article was very interesting because I think it may be the start of making computer interfaces take advantage of audio responses that don't even require words. I've spent a great deal of time assigning different sounds in Windows to different events. For example, I have a very distinctive sound that ICQ makes when I recieve a message. I even went as far as to provide different people with different sounds. I noticed something very interesting, when I went to use ICQ on another machine, I ached to hear the sounds again. It was so strange not hearing them!
I hope one day Windows (or whatever OS I use in the future...) spends more effort into providing a sound-enhanced interface. That would truely provide better a better multi-tasking experience. It'd be cool if, for example, the window on the screen causing the sound was played through the right or left speaker based on where the window is on the screen. Maybe muffle it if a window is under it.
Anybody know of any products for Windows that do this today?
"From crippling diseases to the negative effects of a lifetime of smoking, some people simply cannot use their vocal chords."
For some reason, this sentence conjured up a picture in my mind of Steven Hawking sounding a bit like a furby on the phone.
"a gun has only one rather specific specific use."
You mean killing? What about turning off the TV, scaring off the neighbor's cat, and settling arguments?
Sounds more like a Swiss Army Knife to me!!
LOL! I think it's funny you were modded down for that. It seems pretty obvious you were joking.
Somebody's trigger finger is itchy today!!
Could somebody mod him back up again? He was illustrating my point.
"Today, Mr. Davis has not only kicked his Web habit but also almost completely given up the medium." *Sigh* I remember some news articles suggesting that people were spending too much time on the web. They made it out like the web was addictive and that kids would trade social lives for it. I hated this assumption. I knew people that spent lots of time on IRC, heck I was one of them. It wasnt an addiction so much as just hanging out. Most of the time I was on IRC I was also reading about stuff on the net, trying out new apps, etc. Nowadays, I've achieved some skills that I'm really interested in sharpening. So now a lot of my 'net time' is being spent developing new artwork. I found a place to show off my art, get some critique, and measure myself against the other people out there. I've really integrated the net into my life. I know use both email and instant messaging to keep tabs on my friends, I use tools like Mapquest to get directions to where I'm going, I even get movie reviews and showtimes! I'm not just hunting around the web anymore, I've figured out where I need to go. It's still a very important part of my life. Am I spending less time on it? Yes, I think so. That time's being spent to contribute to the net, though. For example, I post here waaaay too much. Heh. I'm sick of surfing the web being called 'an addiction' like it needs to be treated. That'd be like saying Nasa scientists are addicted to surfing the universe for interesting things.
It takes about 7 minutes for me to kill popups after looking at Porn. I switched to Opera in the last year and don't have that problem now.
Sorry guys, didn't mean to throw the curve.